I think that movies like this are rare and precious. The comedy in this movie is not for everyone, as some will find it offensive. I believe the best laughter comes from a writer that understands how to straddle the line. This film does that for me. Using race as the canvas, the creators of this film, manage to paint a comedic look at racial stereotypes and more importantly, how we view our fellow man. How often can you watch a film that will elicit any 'feelings' from you? There is no doubt that you will experience either laughter or angst. If you can get past some of the acting issues, as well as the fact that this is a low budget affair, I think that this movie is well worth the time investment in viewing.
9 Reviews
Way better than a lot of other HBO films
gphunk1720 November 2003
Don't quote me on the HBO part, but it sure seemed that way. It's was a good movie that at times ran too long, but in general it was good. Not only did it have a good back and forth, "who screwed who" storyline, it addresses very important racial questions and tensions. Very few movies take such abstract looks and judgments at the current. Worth watching.
This is... umm.... interesting....
medrjel5 November 2003
Words can scarcely describe this movie. Loaded with ridiculous stereotypes, a silly plot, and poor music, this movie lacks in just about every category.
Don't be fooled by the IMDB credits. This is not a Michael Dorn movie. He's a secondary character in the grand scheme.
Also listed in the Credit's is an actor named "Prince" - which makes me wonder if it's the same artist formerly known as.... Then again, I'm not sure this movie is worth watching just for that.
Big summary... bunch of teams... one has kidneys... one has $35,000.... one has an "Illegal Substance".... and one has $350,000. Add some confusion and mixups as to who needs to meet who, revenge on being taken, and such, and you end up with this mess of a movie.
Given a choice, I'd pass on this movie.
Don't be fooled by the IMDB credits. This is not a Michael Dorn movie. He's a secondary character in the grand scheme.
Also listed in the Credit's is an actor named "Prince" - which makes me wonder if it's the same artist formerly known as.... Then again, I'm not sure this movie is worth watching just for that.
Big summary... bunch of teams... one has kidneys... one has $35,000.... one has an "Illegal Substance".... and one has $350,000. Add some confusion and mixups as to who needs to meet who, revenge on being taken, and such, and you end up with this mess of a movie.
Given a choice, I'd pass on this movie.
Smacks of film school enthusiasm -- good idea, but half-baked, amateurish delivery
bopdog21 March 2004
I watched "Gristle" primarily for the presence of Michael Dorn, as I enjoyed his Worf portrayal on Star Trek TNG, but had never seen him out of his makeup. Dorn appears to have a nice presence, and probably has the potential for a profitable acting career. This movie, however, gave him little dramatic challenge, except to prove that he can, indeed, use the "F" word.
It appears that this movie was made by someone who fancied himself as a forward-thinking type, with a social conscience. Yeah--- for 1965. Today, the themes are so belabored and sophomoric and cornball that even Spike Lee's dreadful "Bamboozled" looks good in comparison.
This crime-caper flick has an intricate labrynth of double-, triple-, and quadruple-crosses, but the plot scheme is so convoluted that it collapses upon itself within the first 30 minutes. Mostly, after that point, I simply watched out of momentum, and a mild curiosity about how each scene would play out. There is a great cast here-- you will recognize virtually everyone as a character actor from much better movies. Why are they all in this? I suspect it was 1) The work, and some money, even if modest. 2) Perhaps the director knows all these actors from acting classes and social connections around LA--- you know, perhaps they participated to support him, as a fellow struggling movie guy on the third and fourth tiers of the Hollywood scene. Dunno... but the movie was half-baked--- not really "finished." I gave it a 3, although my affection for the actors involved was undiminished from my admiration of their previous work. Let's hope everybody has moved on to more professional, more carefully done, and more thorough projects since.
It appears that this movie was made by someone who fancied himself as a forward-thinking type, with a social conscience. Yeah--- for 1965. Today, the themes are so belabored and sophomoric and cornball that even Spike Lee's dreadful "Bamboozled" looks good in comparison.
This crime-caper flick has an intricate labrynth of double-, triple-, and quadruple-crosses, but the plot scheme is so convoluted that it collapses upon itself within the first 30 minutes. Mostly, after that point, I simply watched out of momentum, and a mild curiosity about how each scene would play out. There is a great cast here-- you will recognize virtually everyone as a character actor from much better movies. Why are they all in this? I suspect it was 1) The work, and some money, even if modest. 2) Perhaps the director knows all these actors from acting classes and social connections around LA--- you know, perhaps they participated to support him, as a fellow struggling movie guy on the third and fourth tiers of the Hollywood scene. Dunno... but the movie was half-baked--- not really "finished." I gave it a 3, although my affection for the actors involved was undiminished from my admiration of their previous work. Let's hope everybody has moved on to more professional, more carefully done, and more thorough projects since.
I found this film to be hilarious -- everyone should see it.
pcompo6 November 2003
I really liked this movie! The script was very funny and the actors, although most are pretty much unknown, delivered the lines well. I found myself laughing out loud frequently throughout the movie.
Michael Dorn is best known as Commander Worf from the Star Trek series, and that character is very stiff and rigid. In this movie Michael got to show a different side, and I feel that he pulled it off very well.
This movie has several subplots working together at once, and when these plots intersect it makes for some pretty funny events. The most pervasive element of the film is the racial undercurrents taking place between four different duos - two black men; one black and one white man; two Cuban men; and two white men. Most of the characters are dealing with illicict merchandise of one form or another, and some of the other supporting characters weave in and out of the plot fairly seemlessly.
I had not previously heard of this film, which tells me that many other folks have not heard of it either. That is really a shame, because I was very pleasantly surprised by the film. I would like to say that this movie is not all comedy, and definitely deserves the R rating for the content and language. Not much gore to speak of, although it certainly is present off camera. It is refreshing to see a movie that doesn't rely on blood and guts to get the point across, leaving the specifics of the gore to the viewers imagination.
Overall I would give this movie a 7 or 8 on a ten-point scale and recommend it highly. I will definitely add this one to my DVD collection. Folks who like Quentin Tarrantino movies should like this, but much more for the witty dialog than the violence. It is also reminiscent of films by Kevin Smith, such as Clerks or Mallrats, in the sense of the witty dialog and quirky characters.
Michael Dorn is best known as Commander Worf from the Star Trek series, and that character is very stiff and rigid. In this movie Michael got to show a different side, and I feel that he pulled it off very well.
This movie has several subplots working together at once, and when these plots intersect it makes for some pretty funny events. The most pervasive element of the film is the racial undercurrents taking place between four different duos - two black men; one black and one white man; two Cuban men; and two white men. Most of the characters are dealing with illicict merchandise of one form or another, and some of the other supporting characters weave in and out of the plot fairly seemlessly.
I had not previously heard of this film, which tells me that many other folks have not heard of it either. That is really a shame, because I was very pleasantly surprised by the film. I would like to say that this movie is not all comedy, and definitely deserves the R rating for the content and language. Not much gore to speak of, although it certainly is present off camera. It is refreshing to see a movie that doesn't rely on blood and guts to get the point across, leaving the specifics of the gore to the viewers imagination.
Overall I would give this movie a 7 or 8 on a ten-point scale and recommend it highly. I will definitely add this one to my DVD collection. Folks who like Quentin Tarrantino movies should like this, but much more for the witty dialog than the violence. It is also reminiscent of films by Kevin Smith, such as Clerks or Mallrats, in the sense of the witty dialog and quirky characters.
The Gristle - I loved this movie!
twinklevango8 January 2006
I watched this movie on cable three times. My boyfriend and I laughed through the whole thing. Although it was a little slow in the beginning, and the ending left us hanging, we still found it refreshingly fun. Of course, we could tell it was probably a newbie director with a less polished presentation than some other movies, but we looked beyond that and really appreciated the humor, actors and twists in the movie. I do not think it was canned and predictable, or cliché. It had a certain kind of humor that you see in movies, but it was handled well. I didn't compare it to other movies. I just enjoyed it. In fact, the characters were disarmingly human at times, given the plot of the show. I didn't get all the twists in the plot the first time through, but that was okay. I loved this show. I loved the actors. I think it is a great effort from a new group. In fact, I am looking for a copy on DVD to add it to my library. So, my recommendation is that people watch it and enjoy the ride.
bzzz.....
L_Miller5 November 2003
Did you ever own one of those electric football games as a kid? Were you like me, and no matter how carefully you brushed those stupid combs on the bases and arranged the players, your carefully painted Vikings and Packers just wound up kind of milling around in the middle of the field with no purpose while the kids on the box were executing option Is and play-action passes?
This is independent filmmaking by someone who really wants to execute a trick play, be a kid on the box like Quentin Tarantino and/or Kevin Smith. A "wacky" caper about kidneys and drugs that "pushes the boundaries" by having characters say dialogue like "I think our Cuban friend with the butt fetish just bought a vowel!" and making people with Hispanic accents quote Speedy Gonzalez at gunpoint.
If you dig this kind of thing (or really want to see Michael Dorn without his makeup turning in a really relaxed and casual acting job - he has some real presence which is completely wasted here) then this is your movie. Otherwise, huge waste of time unless you worked on it or have a friend who did. Wants to be observational but just winds up being a bunch of caricatures standing around in a parking lot waving guns, quoting Marvel Comics and exchanging racial insults.
If you turn up the volume you can hear the field buzzing in the background. Sorry, dude. Sincere but too flawed for a recommendation.
This is independent filmmaking by someone who really wants to execute a trick play, be a kid on the box like Quentin Tarantino and/or Kevin Smith. A "wacky" caper about kidneys and drugs that "pushes the boundaries" by having characters say dialogue like "I think our Cuban friend with the butt fetish just bought a vowel!" and making people with Hispanic accents quote Speedy Gonzalez at gunpoint.
If you dig this kind of thing (or really want to see Michael Dorn without his makeup turning in a really relaxed and casual acting job - he has some real presence which is completely wasted here) then this is your movie. Otherwise, huge waste of time unless you worked on it or have a friend who did. Wants to be observational but just winds up being a bunch of caricatures standing around in a parking lot waving guns, quoting Marvel Comics and exchanging racial insults.
If you turn up the volume you can hear the field buzzing in the background. Sorry, dude. Sincere but too flawed for a recommendation.
Funny, If you are socially aware (or even awake)
racerdex5 December 2003
My brother and I watched this film together, on HBO 2. Actually, we had a bicoastal film viewing. It is the sort of thing that we have always reserved for the finest in quirky film making. How does a movie like this ever get made? The comedy of errors, and concurrently botched confidence schemes lead to hilarious results. We would have spent our hard earned, and stolen, last $110K, to make it as well.
We are certain of the reasons that this film is not popular. It is way too silly, but that gives it its quality, and makes room for it on our video shelves as a potential classic (see "Better Off Dead", "Hollywood Shuffle", "Soul Man" and "Fear of a Black Hat").
We are certain of the reasons that this film is not popular. It is way too silly, but that gives it its quality, and makes room for it on our video shelves as a potential classic (see "Better Off Dead", "Hollywood Shuffle", "Soul Man" and "Fear of a Black Hat").
Proof I am a glutton for punishment.
mrbrianm24 February 2004
As comedian Richard Jeni once said, I watched this movie because I "kept believing it had to get better." I have recently enjoyed the 5 sequel to a film called "my boring toaster' in my kitchen far more than this. Actors? I get it they sometimes need to go thru some awful garbage to reach...not so awful garbage. I don't really have issue with them per se, besides pretty much all of them sucking in this one. My bone to pick is first with the writer. I wanted to ask whether he had the regular or the crayon box with the built in sharpener. And when he got released from the head trauma unit. This borders on parody in the 'what NOT to do" territory. It's only further proof to me that technology is taking over and machines run everything because i cannot imagine a human being anywhere on earth, from Bob the mailman to Pol Pot himself, ever OKing this. It mortally suffers from a 90+ minutes case of 'aren't I so witty with my crazy banter syndrome'. Plop that on top of.."I thought you wrote the plot? Me? No no I thought YOU wrote the plot" and you have a 'MoreMax' premiere showing at 3:55am on channel 791. The only two posiives at all that i can comb from this nightmare was 1. It did end (which nearly is cancelled out by the fact that it exists), and 2. I have seen worse. Granted I was 7 and watching my dog eat his own poop.
Avoid at all costs. Unplug TV in case someone unknowingly flips it on. This is so bad it actually makes the programs on surrounding channels at the same time suffer.
Avoid at all costs. Unplug TV in case someone unknowingly flips it on. This is so bad it actually makes the programs on surrounding channels at the same time suffer.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
